Self Reliance, Inc.

What the center reported

723Consumers served324 carried over, 399 new
1,861Information and referral contacts
$1,734,941Total income
$281,316Part B
$296,437Part C
452Goals achievedof 517 set
7Moved out of institutionsrelocation goals achieved
8Years reportedof 8 since 2016

Funding sources

Income by source, report year 2023Dollars received, as reported. The report does not show expenditure.
Source	Amount
Title VII Part B (through the state)	$281,316
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$296,437
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$0
State government funds	$975,102
Local government funds	$13,220
Private and other	$168,866
Total income	$1,734,941

Eight years of reports

Self Reliance, Inc. by report yearA blank row means no report was found for that year.
Report year	Consumers served	Total income	Part B	Part C	Moved out of institutions
2016	754	$916,282	$274,637	$215,038	0
2017	626	$1,407,289	$253,806	$217,282	0
2018	642	$1,264,132	$276,895	$248,142	8
2019	641	$966,539	$278,057	$258,321	1
2020	633	$744,226	$254,645	$259,067	6
2021	624	$859,464	$277,821	$260,111	5
2022	707	$1,609,055	$273,770	$268,971	7
2023	723	$1,734,941	$281,316	$296,437	7

Consumers served, by year

2016754
2017626
2018642
2019641
2020633
2021624
2022707
2023723

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 3 of 4 by total income). 100 is the most favourable position. How each measure is built and what it cannot tell you.

Relative measures, report year 2023
Measure	Value	National percentile	Size-peer percentile	What it is
Income per consumer	$2,400	59th	62th	Total income divided by consumers served. Lower ranks higher. It is intensity, not efficiency: a center doing nursing-home transitions costs more per person than one doing mostly information.
Income per goal achieved	$3,838	65th	60th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	87.4%	92th	87th	Goals achieved as a share of goals set. A rate near 100% can mean goals are recorded only when already met.
Records closed with all goals met	99.5%	98th	96th	Share of closed consumer records closed as "completed all goals set". Recorded at exit, so a stronger signal than goal counts.
Transitions per 100 consumers	0.97	55th	58th	Relocation-from-institution goals achieved per 100 consumers. Zero is common at small centers; the percentile shows how common.
Transitions per $100,000 of Part C	2.36	59th	53th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	99.5%	51th	48th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	80.0%	67th	67th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 4 of 5 members.
Staff with disabilities	57.0%	15th	16th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 4.0 of 7.0 FTE.
Equity index	35.1	24th	21th	Index of dissimilarity between the race and ethnicity of consumers and of the state's disability population, 0 to 100. Lower ranks higher. Compared with the state, not the center's actual service area.
Income volatility	29.1%	28th	32th	Coefficient of variation of total income across the years reported. Lower ranks higher.
Data-quality flags	0	54th	56th	Failed arithmetic checks in this year's report. Fewer ranks higher. Listed below.

Title VII funds (Parts B and C and Chapter 2) were 33.3% of income; Part B varied by 3.7% (coefficient of variation) across the years reported.

Services requested and received

Consumers requesting and receiving each service, report year 2023Information and referral is counted as contacts (1,861) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
IL skills training	955	955	100.0%
Other services	45	41	91.1%
Youth transition	21	21	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	19	18	94.7%
Peer counseling	14	14	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	2	2	100.0%
Assistive technology	1	1	100.0%
Mobility training	1	1	100.0%
Rehabilitation technology	1	1	100.0%
All services	1,059	1,054	99.5%

Largest unmet demand

Services with ten or more requests, ordered by the share that went unfilled.

Other services: 41 of 45 requests filled (91.1%).
Advocacy and legal services: 18 of 19 requests filled (94.7%).
IL skills training: 955 of 955 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 14 of 14 requests filled (100.0%).
Youth transition: 21 of 21 requests filled (100.0%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	24	10	11
Mobility and transportation	167	157	8
Community-based living	36	34	1
Educational	28	11	17
Self-care	203	185	17
Information access and technology	42	40	2
Personal resource management	8	8	0
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	8	7	1
Other	1	0	1

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	1
5 to 19	13
20 to 24	19
25 to 59	179
60 and older	511
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	25
Mental or emotional	51
Physical	555
Hearing	50
Vision	7
Multiple disabilities	30
Other	5

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Florida residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 28 consumers of unknown race. State shares are from ACS B18101A to B18101I. A ratio above 1 means the group is a larger share of consumers than of the state's disability population.
Group	Consumers	Share of consumers	Share of state disability population	Ratio
White	228	32.8%	57.4%	0.57
Black or African American	208	29.9%	11.7%	2.55
American Indian or Alaska Native	3	0.4%	0.3%	1.47
Asian	20	2.9%	1.6%	1.77
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	1	0.1%	0.0%	3.27
Two or more races	3	0.4%	10.9%	0.04
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	232	33.4%	18.0%	1.85

Hispanic or Latino is an ethnicity reported alongside race in the PPR, so shares can sum to more than 100%. The comparison is with the whole state, which overstates any mismatch for a center that serves one part of it.

Data quality

Eight arithmetic checks run over every center's report. They test whether the tables agree with each other, nothing more. How often each check fails nationally.

None of the arithmetic checks failed for this report. That means the tables add up, not that the counts are verified.

What this cannot tell you

The report is unaudited self-report. Nobody verifies the consumer counts.
It reports income, not expenditure. A cost measure here is a stand-in until checked against the center's audited financial statements.
Part B and Part C outcomes are not separable. The center reports total activity.
There is no county, city or island detail in the public file.
Percentiles compare centers whose definitions of "consumer" and "goal" may differ. The data-quality row is the only signal of that in the public data.
Relative position is not impact. Nothing here supports a causal claim about what the center changed in anyone's life.

Source: Administration for Community Living, Centers for Independent Living Program Performance Report public datafiles, report years 2016 to 2023. Generated 2026-10-25.